Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Native Hawaiian Burials topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs working groups on culturally sensitive shorelines and studies of burial‑site management; OHA, SHPD and community speakers weigh in
Summary
The committee passed measures creating working groups to identify culturally sensitive shorelines and to study transferring management of Native Hawaiian burial sites; testimony from OHA, SHPD, island burial councils, and community members emphasized descendant involvement and cultural protocols.
The House Committee on Water & Land on March 25 approved two related measures advancing work on Native Hawaiian burial sites and culturally sensitive shorelines. HR118/HCR122 directs DLNR and partners to form a collaborative working group to survey, identify, and monitor culturally sensitive shorelines impacted by erosion; HR186/HCR193 asks the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) to convene a working group to study whether Native Hawaiian burial site management under Chapter 6E should transfer from the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) to OHA.
SHPD administrator Jessica Puff said her office stood on its written testimony and offered clarifying comments. OHA’s Lena Alalei testified in support and asked that the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands be added as a named party to the shoreline working group; the committee adopted that recommendation. Community speakers, including Mejana Kapoi, a student intern and Kanaka ʻōiwi, described iwi kūpuna as foundational to identity and urged protective action for shorelines threatened by erosion. Kapoi told the committee, “As a native Hawaiian … the iwi kūpuna are not merely remains. They are a testament to our belonging here.”
Representative members raised questions about how courts and administrative actions intersect with the work of a collaborative group. Committee members discussed a recent appellate case referenced during testimony; OHA’s compliance specialist clarified that a separate case dealt with archaeological permits and said the working groups would support better communication between SHPD, OHA, and community descendants.
Testimony described differing cultural practices across islands and families regarding whether to move remains inland when erosion exposes them. Edward Hale and cultural practitioners explained there is no single practice: “The answer is whatever the families in that community say,” one testifier said, urging the working group to ensure descendant-led decisionmaking.
On HR186 — the study of transferring burial-site management — OHA said it supported a study and did not oppose technical amendments suggested by SHPD, but argued for greater descendant-led decisionmaking and for burial councils to have clear mandates and support. Committee members accepted language that clarifies that island burial councils are responsible for determining whether remains should be preserved in place or removed, and added the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands to the shoreline working-group membership.
Both measures passed with committee amendments. The committee directed staff to include the technical changes and to forward certified copies to invited agencies and community stakeholders.
Ending: The committee approved the working groups and study with amendments to increase agency participation and to emphasize descendant participation and the role of island burial councils in deciding treatment of iwi kūpuna.
